From: Corkran, Jerry L [mailto:Jerry.Corkran@CooperIndustries.com] 

Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2011 6:47 PM 

To: Ahuja, Raj; Ballard, Robert; Colopy, Craig A; Dix, Larry; Foldi, Joseph; Girgis, Ramsis; Hopkinson, 

Philip; Johnson, Charles; Kennedy, Matthew; Kennedy, Sheldon; Locarno, Mario; Marek, Richard; 

Patterson, Wesley; Puri, Jeewan; Rickmann, Johannes; Sampat, Mahesh; Sim, H. Jin; Creevy, Jim; 

Caskey, John; Trujillo, Antonio; Meyers, Aaron 

Cc: Alex Hofmann; Andrew Delaski; Aris Marantan; Art Rosenfeld; Bob Saint; Bob Smith; Brenda 

Edwards; Brian Coffey; Caitlin Johnson; Carlos Gaytan; Charlie Drexler; Charlie Stevens; Chris Bolduc; 

Chris Brown; Clark Silcox; Dan Cohen; Daniel Young; David Flaten; Emily Marchetti; Eric Peterson; 

Freeman, Jeremiah; Gary Fernstrom; Greg Coulter; Greg Rosenquist; Hirsch, Bruce R; James Lass; 

Jennifer Tiedeman; Corkran, Jerry L; Jerry Hodge; Jerry Schoen; Jim Raba; Joanna Mauer; John 

Cymbalsky; John Rossetti; Katie Coughlin; Ken Winder; Mahesh P. Sampat; Matthew Nardotti; Maxine 

Savitz; Meg Waltner; Meyers, Aaron; Michael Hyland; Michael Rivest; Millure, Dave; Pamela Costello; Phil 

Harter; Phil Hopkinson; Polinski, Raymond; Puesh Kumar; Richard W. Parker; Rick Anderson; Rob 

Greeson; Robert Berman; Robert van Buskirk; Robin Roy; Ryan, Paul; Scott Beck; Simmons, Chuck; Steve 

Nadel; Steve Rosenstock; Ted Johnstone; Thomas Petrosino; Tim Ballo; Tom Eckman; Zhimei Luo 

Subject: FW: MVLI LCC & NIA with 2010 material prices 

This memo is being circulated to the entire committee and to the NEMA members to encourage the

manufacturers to attempt to create some of the designs being proposed by the various groups involved

with the DOE transformer efficiency process. The attachment lists the target EL0 to EL7 efficiency targets

the DOE is considering.  If  the DOE 2016 EL attachment is used, please cross check the efficiencies

generated against the latest DOE energy level data to verify  the accuracy of the attachment and also to

determine if the DOE data has changed since the attachment was created. The transformer

manufacturers  are encouraged to give the DOE some input about the designs that  are not buildable

using M3 core steel or are not competitive using M3 core steel.    

Comments listed below apply to the medium voltage fluid filled designs based on reviews of the CPS

designs created:  

 The OPS programs used by the DOE lack the programming to allow for the stray losses that occur

in the core  clamp, tank and windings when high current secondary designs are created.  This

makes the DOE efficiencies very difficult to obtain for the high secondary current designs.

 The three phase designs become increasingly difficult to create as the kVA goes up using M3 core

steel.  

 Designs with high stray losses such as the  dual voltage or 208Y/120 secondary are difficult or

impossible in the larger three phase kVA sizes using M3 core steel.   

 EL1 levels  according to calculations by Hopkinson and others are not economically justified, but

they do result in a mixture of amorphous and M3 steel designs.  The DOE information shows this

same EL1 crossover point between M3 and amorphous cores.

 EL2  levels will require mostly amorphous core steel designs to be competitive.   

 We expect  EL3 and above efficiencies to be impossible to supply using  M3, resulting in a need

for 100% amorphous cores for all EL levels 3 and above.  Note – this level was proposed to the

DOE by the Environmentalist group that were members of the DOE WG.
 The 3% cost of money used in the DOE payback calculations seems very optimistic over the next

30 years based on the last 30 years.

 The DOE 3 phase amorphous designs created by the OPS programs are based on assumptions

that the existing core clamp designs built to hold short circuit forces using silicon core steel will

be adequate using amorphous core material.  This conclusion is incorrect, because we know that

unique and more expensive core clamps will be required to pass the ANSI short circuit

requirements when using Amorphous material and this has not been addressed by OPS.

Regards,

                Jerry Corkran

From: Meyers, Aaron 

Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2011 10:52 AM 

To: Bob Smith 

Cc: 'Richard Parker'; 'PhilHopkinson'; 'Robert Greeson'; Corkran, Jerry L; Trujillo, Antonio; Meyers, Aaron 

Subject: RE: MVLI LCC & NIA with 2010 material prices 

Greetings Bob,

I agree with you, the lower price of M3 does just artificially shift the crossover point for M3 versus

amorphous to a higher efficiency.  Perhaps this is why the DOE took it upon themselves to “correct” the

data, in spite of the fact that I recall nobody explicitly requesting it?  It feels like par for the course

though.  It seems as though someone has fallen in love with amorphous and no matter what anyone

says or does, they’re unable to see that it is not the miracle cure.  

I also agree with you in that I believe the negotiating portion is over.  It was nice meeting you and Rob

face to face and working together in an effort to make the right collective decision.  For those who

actually listened to all of the information presented, there seemed to be some form of congruence that

was established at the end.   

Interestingly, I was watching a program that seemed to be exploring the “what‐if” scenario of prolonged

lack of electricity.  Even things that I hadn’t immediately associated with electricity stop working! Pumps

were unable to run to pump water up into towers so people’s tap water no longer worked, the sewage

pumps were unable to run (I’ll spare you the details on that one), etc.  People became desperate and

makeshift gangs were looting neighboring houses within 3 days! Some people even took to scattering

clothing and personal belongings out on their lawns to give the appearance that they had already been

looted in an attempt to keep their families safe inside.  The narrator of the program cited a real blackout

in Miami I think, and in a very short time (3 days I think), EVERYTHING at Walmart had been cleared off

the shelves.  Not just food, but toys, tools, anything and everything! It was essentially an empty

warehouse at that point.  They also said that automatic gunfire could be heard frequently throughout

the city.  The reliability of our electrical grid has been so good for so long, that I don’t think it was even a

real consideration.  I’ll admit, I hadn’t assessed the risk in the same light that this program did.  After

hearing all of the testimony, and speaking to a few Utilities who are not actively involved in the

subcommittee, I believe without a doubt that increasing the efficiency requirements on distribution
transformers will diminish the reliability of our electrical grid.  Perhaps nothing like the “what if”

scenario will ever happen, but the severity of the situation certainly deserves some consideration.  I’m

even considering storing at least a few days worth of water, just as a personal emergency plan.

Getting back to transformers...

I am continuing to assess the impact that moving to the proposed higher efficiency levels will have on

Cooper’s business.  One thing I discovered yesterday is that I cannot get ANY designs at EL1 and above

for several voltage combinations of 75kVA single‐phase poles using ANY CGO steel using the existing

programs. When I dug a little deeper in order to determine what the limiting factors were I found that

the existing tank sizes were too small and that some larger winding conductors would need to be

added.  I found a similar situation with three‐phase – the higher the kVA, the harder it was to get

designs at the higher EL’s proposed.  You may want to calculate the efficiency levels for all of the

standard kVA’s using the 0.75 scaling rule and run some designs to see if that is the case for you as well.  

If the subcommittee truly wants to keep M3 in the picture, it isn’t at EL2 or  EL3!

Best Regards,

Aaron

From: Bob Smith [mailto:bsmith@federalpacific.com] 

Sent: Monday, December 05, 2011 2:29 PM 

To: Meyers, Aaron 

Cc: 'Richard Parker'; 'PhilHopkinson'; 'Robert Greeson' 

Subject: RE: MVLI LCC & NIA with 2010 material prices 

Aaron:

You’re right.  The lower price of M3 would just “artificially” shift to the right the crossover point for M3

and Amorphous to a higher efficiency.

I have left Richard a voicemail requesting him to investigate with the utility members if there is ANY

increase in transformer efficiency that they would support.  Until they get more convincing data, I think

the Negotiating Rule Making phase of this exercise is OVER.  I think we all learned a lot, made new

friends, and worked hard to make this successful.

Regards,  

Bob Smith, PE 

Product Manager 

Federal Pacific

601 Old Airport Road

Bristol, VA 24201 

  

TEL: (276) 645-8836

FAX: (276) 645-8956

CELL: (276) 591-6143

Email: bsmith@federalpacific.com
The information contained in this message and any attachments is intended only for the use of the individual or 

entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from 

disclosure under applicable law. If you have received this message in error, you are prohibited from copying, 

distributing, or using the information. Please contact the sender immediately by return e-mail and completely delete 

the original message from your system. 

  

From: Meyers, Aaron [mailto:Aaron.Meyers@CooperIndustries.com] 

Sent: Monday, December 05, 2011 2:58 PM 

To: Richard Parker; Alex Hofmann; Andrew Delaski; Aris Marantan; Art Rosenfeld; Bob Saint; Bob Smith; 

Brenda Edwards; Brian Coffey; Caitlin Johnson; Carlos Gaytan; Caskey, John; Charlie Drexler; Charlie 

Stevens; Chris Bolduc; Chris Brown; Clark Silcox; Creevy, Jim; Dan Cohen; Daniel Young; David Flaten; 

Emily Marchetti; Eric Peterson; Freeman, Jeremiah; Gary Fernstrom; Greg Coulter; Greg Rosenquist; 

Hirsch, Bruce R; James Lass; Jennifer Tiedeman; Corkran, Jerry L; Jerry Hodge; Jerry Schoen; Jim Raba; 

Joanna Mauer; John Cymbalsky; John Rossetti; Katie Coughlin; Ken Winder; Mahesh P. Sampat; Matthew 

Nardotti; Maxine Savitz; Meg Waltner; Michael Hyland; Michael Rivest; Millure, Dave; Pam Costello; Phil 

Harter; Phil Hopkinson; Polinski, Raymond; Puesh Kumar; Rick Anderson; Rob Greeson; Robert Berman; 

Robert van Buskirk; Robin Roy; Ryan, Paul; Scott Beck; Simmons, Chuck; Steve Nadel; Steve Rosenstock; 

Ted Johnstone; Thomas Petrosino; Tim Ballo; Tom Eckman; Wes Patterson; Zhimei Luo 

Subject: RE: MVLI LCC & NIA with 2010 material prices 

Richard,

I just now found the time to review the revised information you had sent out with 2010 prices.  

Something isn’t making sense to me.  My assumption was that this version would include the corrected

start of benefits date (2016 rather than 2010), and would use $1.88 for M3 core steel rather than $1.30.  

With the price of all core steels being much higher in the 2010 analysis, I would have expected to see the

incremental first cost go up; however, the results show quite the opposite.  For instance, DL5 EL1 the

incremental first cost is $4794 using the 2011 data, yet it is only $2293 using the higher prices from the

2010 data.  What am I missing?  Can someone explain this?

Thanks and Best Regards,

Aaron

From: Richard Parker [mailto:richardparkerdc@gmail.com] 

Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2011 9:35 PM 

To: Alex Hofmann; Andrew Delaski; Aris Marantan; Art Rosenfeld; Bob Saint; Bob Smith; Brenda 

Edwards; Brian Coffey; Caitlin Johnson; Carlos Gaytan; Caskey, John; Charlie Drexler; Charlie Stevens; 

Chris Bolduc; Chris Brown; Clark Silcox; Creevy, Jim; Dan Cohen; Daniel Young; David Flaten; Emily 

Marchetti; Eric Peterson; Freeman, Jeremiah; Gary Fernstrom; Greg Coulter; Greg Rosenquist; Hirsch, 

Bruce R; James Lass; Jennifer Tiedeman; Corkran, Jerry L; Jerry Hodge; Jerry Schoen; Jim Raba; Joanna 

Mauer; John Cymbalsky; John Rossetti; Katie Coughlin; Ken Winder; Mahesh P. Sampat; Matthew 

Nardotti; Maxine Savitz; Meg Waltner; Meyers, Aaron; Michael Hyland; Michael Rivest; Millure, Dave; Pam 

Costello; Phil Harter; Phil Hopkinson; Polinski, Raymond; Puesh Kumar; Richard W. Parker; Rick 
Anderson; Rob Greeson; Robert Berman; Robert van Buskirk; Robin Roy; Ryan, Paul; Scott Beck; 

Simmons, Chuck; Steve Nadel; Steve Rosenstock; Ted Johnstone; Thomas Petrosino; Tim Ballo; Tom 

Eckman; Wes Patterson; Zhimei Luo 

Subject: Fwd: MVLI LCC & NIA with 2010 material prices 

Dear Colleagues, 

Attached, as requested and promised, is the corrected LCC/NIA for liquid immersed 

transformers based on 2010 materials prices. Thanks to Chris and Katie for quickly following 

through on this. 

All best, 

Richard Parker 

Attached are the corrected LCC and downstream NIA results based on the 

2010 material prices. Please distribute as you see fit. 

-- Chris 

---- 

Chris Bolduc 

Energy Efficiency Standards Group 

Environmental Energy Technologies Division 

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 

t. 416-535-7546

c. 647-832-4021